[SPLIT] Quantum Physics Disproves Reality

[Kyuuketsuki]

The following is a summary of what has been discussed in a completely different thread ... if you (Jon Paul) disagree with this summary or reckon I've missed somethign important PM me and I will change it.

Kyuuketsuki:
Quantum physics does not disprove reality

Jon Paul:
I've never said it does. I've specifically defended the marginalised, realist Bohmiam interpretation of quantum mechanics in this very thread. But the prevailing Copenhagist orthodoxy is far more radical, to the point of arealism in many cases.

Kyuuketsuki (quoting Jon Paul):
"It's not me making assumptions; I am only pointing out that you are yourself making assumptions, such as the assumption that you are conscious, the assumption that reality exists (in spite of quantum physicists disagreeing!), the assumption that other minds exists, etc."

Jon Paul:
I said quantum physicists disagreeing. Not me (I am not a quantum physicist), and not Bohmists, but specifically Bohrists/Copenhagists.

Kyuuketsuki:
Yes you did but you specifically used it in such a way as to imply (more than imply IMO) that those who assume reality is the default state are wrong. Are you now retracting that? Do you accept that quantum physics in no way demonstrates reality to not exist?

Jon Paul:
No, they are not wrong. I stated from the beginning in that discussion that I am a realist. What quantum mechanics demonstrates depends on the interpretation, arealist/acausalist (Copenhagen orthodoxy) or realist/causalist (Bohm).

Kyuuketsuki:
A realist would assume that reality exists ... you live in a metaphysical fantasy world.

Jon Paul:
I do assume it to exist, but I am able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it, to a great length, and to the length of defending it from errorneous criticism, while I am only really trying to understand how and why I know it is wrong, rather than immediately dismissing it as unworthy of examination.

Kyuuketsuki:
No, it doesn't because quantum mechanics describes physical reality, how matter is composed of molecules & atoms and how they are composed of yet smaller particles still.

Jon Paul:
You are presenting the classical Einsteinian view. You clearly haven't observed the Kantianist direction physics has taken since Bohr.

Quantum mechanics is not in itself physicalism or realism, only the largely rejected Bohmian interpretation is. Quantum mechanics in itself, is a theory of observation, and specifically in the standard interpretation, namely the Copenhagen interpretation, a highly subjectivist and aphysicalist one, which maintains that the quantum realm we know is fundamentally unreal and aphysical because as soon as we have information about it, that information has changed according to our observational acts, in Kantian style with the inacessibility of the thing-in-it-itself; the Copenhagen interpretation largely makes this a fact.

Why do you think such great minds as Einstein, Karl Popper, Bohm, etc, worked hardly against the Copenhagen interpretation? Because of the radical character of it's findings, revising the entire classical view of the world.

There is a book I can recommend which tries to fight the bitter fight of realism, entitled "Quantum Theory and the Flight From Realism: Philosophical Responses to Quantum Mechanics". But you should note that this is not representative of a standard interpretation of quantum mechanics, which involves fundamental quantum arealism, aphysicalism, unknowability outside of the unrealistic observationally modified information and even then, quantum nonlocality, quantum indeterminacy, quantum acausality, uncertainty, and other things in stark contradiction to classical, Einsteinian metaphysics, and in Einstein's words, a "spooky" picture of the universe.

Note: This discussion is ongoing and I am considering my response.

Kyu